The Gateway, Teal Swan, and the message vs the teacher

[Mandy]

It's for separate selves by separate selves, it's entertainment, it's more of the same, Keeping up the the Kardashians. Wild Wild Country is a brilliant story in my opinion, a story told by a great storyteller. Is it fair, or true? No one asks these questions about fiction, and no one is entertained by the answers. 

[Loop]

@Mandy

 

Yep, intellectual understanding can be piled up, and it is useful to hear some of the things they say.
 

Insights arise from everyone, even the most disturbing criminals. Not saying Teal or Leo is, but, It isn’t like I’m blindly following Heavens Gate, or Manson, or any of the like, just watch what seems like people trying to do things, maybe you feel “Yeah I don’t resonate with that.” Or “Yeah I resonate with that but not the context it was said in”. Trust the gut.

We get attached to spirituality in so many sneaky ways, & watching the conditioning effect other’s seeming interpretations of it can be very powerful for our own healing.
 

[Phil]

16 minutes ago, Loop said:

@Phil

 

Yeah, seems to be beliefs about separate self to improve more, understand more, getting stuck in a never ending loop of ‘self-improvement’. Which is essentially like decorating, & rearranging the chairs on the titanic. 😂

Lol nice!

16 minutes ago, Loop said:

 

Re-programming vs De-programming.

 

Exactly. 

 

14 minutes ago, Mandy said:

That's not always the case though, both are capable of saying wise and profound things, of being in the Vortex or out of the Vortex, like all apparent human beings. I don't think that can or should be denied. And I also don't think saying such is giving them a dangerous amount of credit. The only thing to be questioned of value is the credit given or refused itself. 

Accrediting or attributing capabilities or incapabilities to what is apparent is denial of… apparent, isn’t it so?

 

[Phil]

10 minutes ago, Mandy said:

It's for separate selves by separate selves, it's entertainment, it's more of the same, Keeping up the the Kardashians. Wild Wild Country is a brilliant story in my opinion, a story told by a great storyteller. Is it fair, or true? No one asks these questions about fiction, and no one is entertained by the answers. 

Separate selves is the fundamental means of manipulation in a cult of personality.  

[Mandy]

@Loop ❤️ What is Source has no source. 

 

1 minute ago, Phil said:

Accrediting or attributing capabilities or incapabilities to what is apparent is denial of… apparent, isn’t it so?

Accrediting to what is apparent would be would be acceptance of the apparent as the source of it. So there's believed to be a separate outside source of light and a separate outside source of darkness. 

[Loop]

1 minute ago, Mandy said:

❤️ What is Source has no source. 

Every bug is Awakening, 

Swallow it Whole.

 

Every trigger is showing us where the healing is,

We don’t need teachers when we have our own integrity,

& the open heart of Curiosity.

 
🐸🦟

 

[Loop]

What isn’t apparent?

 

Don’t ever let yourself hold onto the light that peaked through, that is just an insight, not embodiment.

The full Embodiment is Nothing,

That is Well-Being.

 

[Phil]

38 minutes ago, Mandy said:

Accrediting to what is apparent would be would be acceptance of the apparent as the source of it.

Are separate selves illusory or apparent?

[Mandy]

15 minutes ago, Phil said:

Are separate selves illusory or apparent?

The separation is illusory. 

[Jonas Long]

8 hours ago, Phil said:

Are separate selves illusory or apparent?

What is the difference between illusory and apparent?

[Jonas Long]

8 hours ago, Mandy said:

The separation is illusory. 

Can't you also say "apparent"?

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Jonas Long said:

What is the difference between illusory and apparent?

Illusory is nonexistent, appearance is existence. The screen’s appearing as ‘the movie’. Thoughts appear about a separate self, but there isn’t one. In that the separate self is nonexistent, it’s illusory, the of believing thoughts, or thought attachment. Some apparent teachings are based on the direct ignorance of there being a separate self, and the mistaken identity projected as separate selves baked into the teaching… with baseline consciousnesses, which can or are increasing their consciousness to different levels of consciousness, while teachers and students are nonexistent, illusory. Cult wise, Scientology with thetan levels and Heaven’s Gate with reaching alien consciousness are probably the most common examples.  Consciousness never ceases being infinite. Infinite can not know finite. 

 

🤍

[Jonas Long]

21 minutes ago, Phil said:

Illusory is nonexistent, appearance is existence.

Doesn't "illusory" imply the appearance of something that "isn't there"?

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Jonas Long said:

Doesn't "illusory" imply the appearance of something that "isn't there"?

If it’s not there there’s no appearance of it. 

[Jonas Long]

36 minutes ago, Phil said:

If it’s not there there’s no appearance of it. 

What about "false evidence appearing real"? 

[Phil]

@Jonas Long

Yeah. Thoughts are apparent. The ‘off ness’ of the apparent interpretation is felt. 

Horse (perception) and unicorn (no perception). 

[Jonas Long]

10 minutes ago, Phil said:

@Jonas Long

Yeah. Thoughts are apparent. The ‘off ness’ of the apparent interpretation is felt. 

Horse (perception) and unicorn (no perception). 

Why wouldn't you call that "illusion"?  The seeming-real-but-not?

[Mandy]

"There are still others for Rupert Spira." -Leo Gura

 

 I think we could all do much better by realizing that no one comes out on top. Even commenting on someone's teaching or understanding as a whole is based on one big massive false assumption, "seperate selves have understanding". We can certainly fruitfully discuss specific assertions that have been made though, and love IS and is the awareness that it always starts and ends with us. 

[Loop]

9 minutes ago, Mandy said:

 I think we could all do much better by realizing that no one comes out on top. Even commenting on someone's teaching or understanding as a whole is based on one big massive false assumption, "seperate selves have understanding".

Exactly, this isn’t a game really, that perspective can get so trivial & annoying. “I’m gonna beat the game of life”, which means I have to be the best. Winning means “I am more developed then everyone else”, so I have to gaslight everyone so they don’t see me as a loser.

 

Sweeping comments about a whole thing are usually this, a form of not really go into the points made, possibly attacking the character of who said it. Everyone’s perspective has some truth to it, even if they are using it to manipulate.

Yeah so, you can learn from anything/ anyone. When you are doing wildlife photography you don’t go straight up to the animals, let them do their thing, watch them.

Existence is so fascinating. 

 

[Phil]

8 hours ago, Jonas Long said:

Why wouldn't you call that "illusion"?  The seeming-real-but-not?

Real isn’t dualistic.